Soviet Cinema of the 1950s

In this essay I will examine Soviet cinema through the context of official expectation as codified in the doctrine of Socialist Realism. I will establish a chronological dichotomy at the heart of the 1950s in the USSR and so the differing political context of each period will be examined and it's effect on Soviet cinema analysed. I will first look at the socio-political situation in the post war Stalinist period, and then move on to discuss the cinema of the time. Following this I will look closely at two thaw era films, 'Cranes are Flying' and 'BalIad of a Soldier' to analyse the award winning Soviet cinema of the thaw. will argue that while the shift from Stalin to Kruschev did give art and culture more room for expression, that this increase was still heavily curtailed by CPSU control and ideology. I will also show that technical excellence is a feature of Soviet cinema, in terms of cinematography and scale.

In analysing Soviet cinema we must first establish a historical framework in which to examine the themes and issues of the art form. The 1950s in the USSR can be divided into two different periods, with the defining event being the death of Stalin in 1953 which cleaves the decade in two. The period up to Stalin’s death is part of the post-war period 1946 - 1953, which was harsh and brutal for the Soviet people and characterised by use of art as merely a political tool. This Cold War started in this period and the paranoia and militarism of that emerging conflict was reflected in every aspect of Soviet society,

The period following the dictator's death is defined by Kruschev's speech "On the Personality Cult and its Consequences" and a thaw in the severity of the regime's repression. This manifested itself in the arts with a loosening of censorship, with books such as "One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich" published which would have unthinkable during the preceding Stalinist period. In Kruschev's speech there are numerous mentions of the sycophancy of Stalinist cinema, even going so far as to describe his experience of the “country and agriculture only from films. And these films dressed up and beautified the existing situation in agriculture.”
In the post war Stalinist period, Stalin remained as dictator, and his rule was as brutal and capricious as ever, and the promise of material advancement as prophecised by Marxism-Leninism was swept away in the militarisation of the early cold war. In these types of conditions cinema has been a traditional form of escapism, such as depression era Hollywood, yet in this period the Soviet film industry produced a mere 124 feature films.


The censorship of Stalin and that of the wider CPSU is characterised by Zhdanov. Zdhanov had been instrumental in instigating 'Socialist Realism', so that his legacy in cultural matters that Social Realism is almost interchangeable with 'Zhdanovism'. At the behest of party luminaries like Zhdanov, violence and murder that were the tools of repression discouraged entrance into the Film Industry, and this led to a paucity of productions experienced in the post war USSR. This was a continuation and culmination of a trend that began in the 1930s during the purges. Repression meant that Soviet Cinema in the post war Stalinist period was rigid and formulaic through the heavy control exercised by the CPSU, and this was exacerbated by the effects of the Great Patriotic War. The conflict caused immense privation in all areas of Soviet society and economy, and this is shown in the Cinema of the period, in both output and by the use of captured filmstock from the Third Reich. The material circumstances of the post war period were felt by belligerents across the globe (except in the untouched USA), but despite this cinema experienced "A Golden Age" in Japan,  and similar vibrancy in the other states such as the U.K. And Italy.

Post-war Soviet cinema has been classified into a number of genres that share many stylistic qualities, amongst which artistic documentaries and biographies stand as being most indicative of CPSU policy. Artistic Documentaries were neither artistic or documentaries but fictional accounts of the great patriotic war.
They are notable for depicting Stalin as a character where before he did not appear on screen, which seems strange given the cult of personality surrounding the Soviet dictator. Stalin was not a charismatic leader, nor was he a physically imposing character which explains his absence from the big screen. Despite this the 'Cult of Personality' was a powerful force. This can be seen in films such as "The Oath" and "The Fall of Berlin" amongst others, in the undiluted praise of Stalin and to a lesser extent the Soviet leadership. The history they portray is one from the top of Soviet society, particularly of Stalin; these films are uninterested in the experiences of the Soviet people. The 'Cult of Personality' was highly prominent in cinema: these films validate Stalin as leader and the CPSUduring the war as if Stalin and STAVKA were the sole forces that defeated the Third Reich. This arrangement is demonstrated in “The Fall of Berlin”, in which a solider - worker is the ostensibly the focus of the film, but the caricatures and of the leader of the foreign powers and the stylisation of each scene over power his presence. These films are often epic and feature extras from the Red Army which does give an air of authenticity the scripts lacked.

This aggrandisement extended beyond the glorification of 'Papa Stalin' to other fields, so that Russian and Soviet scientists were the geniuses behind the major advances of modern civilization, that Russian authors the greatest without exception and similarly for composers and admirals. These 'Biographies' were part of the emerging Cold War, and also a reflection of the Russian nationalism unleashed in the Great Patriotic War. The content of these films because of the falsification of events could be tailored to meet Party approval, rather than for artistic or popular appeal which bequeathed to them “a bland uniformity of style”. These fictional re-tellings of history are the logical extension of the show trials of the purges so that not only society is bent to the will of the party but the history of science and culture itself.

The “Kruschev Thaw” removed these constraints which were linked to the 'cult of personality' in promoting Stalin, and that of false histories to promote non-existent Russian and Soviet achievements but kept in place ideological doctrines as regarded the arts, and by extension cinema. A notable example is that of the winner of the Palme d'Or at the 1958 Cannes Film Festival, Mikhail Kalatozov's “Cranes are Flying”. The subject of the film is the Great Patriotic War, but instead of promoting the “Cult of Personality” 'Cranes are Flying' counts the human cost of that war, this demonstrates the shift that took place during 'the Thaw'.

On a surface level this film is the story of a lovelorn victim of the Great Patriotic War; Veronika's struggle is as much with the misery of war as with her own sadness at her boyfriend's death. There is a clear dichotomy at the heart of the film, that can be applies at a personal and societal level, of those loyal and true, and those selfish and deceitful. Veronika is raped by her boyfriend's cousin, Mark, and out of shame marries him. Mark avoided service through bribery and deceit, whereas Boris, Veronika's boyfriend/fiancée, volunteered. Boris was a hard worker, and is shown at work: strenuous manual labour, where Mark was an artist, seemingly lazy and indulgent, lacking self control. The contrast is clear: Mark betrayed his family and his country whereas Boris was loyal and worthy of Veronika's love. Even Boris's death was selfless and courageous as he saved the life of one who he had fought previously for mocking his relationship with Veronika.

There are moments of sarcasm and dissent directed at the regime, notably when Fyodor Ivanovich says “Comrade Boris, fight to the last drop of blood, and beat the fascists! And we at the plant will meet and exceed our production quotas......We've heard all that before.” This seems to be outrageous dissent, against both the industrial targets and of the war effort but it represents a deep internalisation of rhetoric, and faced with the service of his only son Fyodor comes across as more a concerned father rather than a 'subversive'. He is also shown later in the film to be a dedicated and high level doctor, who motivates his patients in a manner that would befit a propagandist. The concern of the film at a moral level is against anti-social behaviour, rather than explicitly anti-soviet behaviour. The two are linked however as the CPSU is the state and society, so anti-social behaviour is ultimately subversive.

The cinematography of the film is excellent and owes a debt to the Soviet avant garde of the 1920's, with sophisticated montages, but also to the epics of Soviet propaganda in the massive crowd scenes. These show seemingly the entirety of socialist society, there are lovers, children, parents and grandparents in one seamless shot panning across a fence, a fence that separates the private lives of the people seeing off their loved ones, with the official lives of the Soviet citizens drafted into the Red Army. Another shot shoes Boris racing up the stairs to Veronika, which tracks him all the way circling with him in a piece of cinematography that leaves one breathless even now, with the sophisticated camera work matching Boris's frenetic dash. 'Cranes are Flying' is a continuation of the work of the avant garde rather than a fresh start for Soviet cinema. The avant garde was halted in it's tracks and so by allowing it to continue 'the thaw' can be seen as reasserting a revolutionary tradition.

Another film that demonstrates the increased freedom of the thaw within the confines of the Soviet system is the 1962 BAFTA wining “Ballad of a Soldier” directed by Grigori Chukhrai, released in the USSR in 1959. The film like “Cranes are Flying” is film about the effects of the Great Patriotic War on ordinary people, but instead of focusing on the trials of an individual in the face of death and misery, it is a 'road film' where a young soldier travels across the country to see his mother in a distant rural village. The film uses an interesting plot device in that the opening scene tells us of the soldiers death “ buried far from his birthplace, near a town with a foreign name.” We know the fate of young Alyosha before he even begins the journey which is the core of the film. This never undermines the power of the film and in many ways reinforces the meaning of his journey.
On his journey Alyosha meets a young girl Shura, who is going home to see her pilot boyfriend injured in combat, and they gradually form a friendship which grows into a romantic attachment, so that he protects her from arrest by a corrupt guard at one point in the film. Their relationship is a never consummated but their young passion is a liberating force in the film, compared to the war torn landscape, crammed trains and endless plains. As Alyosha leaves on the final train home to his village Shura says she never had a boyfriend. Alyosha then thinks on the train home that this was really an expression of love and he regrets not reciprocating. This can be seen as mirroring the lack of expression under Stalin and the need for expression now. The film is largely devoid of open sloganeering, but like 'Cranes are Flying' it is concerned with anti-social behaviour, such as that of the corrupt carriage guard or the cheating wife of the soldier Pavlov.

This film owes less of a debt to the avant garde tradition than 'Cranes are Flying' and it has a less stylised look, but does come from that tradition. There are less long tracking shots, and it has a rapidity in the editing that the Kalatozov does not. It intersperses the film with moving landscape shots, which give us a feel of the vast Russian landscape and the sensation of movement, which given the nature of the film is necessary.
IN conclusion the key features of Soviet cinema in the 1950s were ideological correctness, whether it be Stalinist or Kruschevite. The systemic features of Soviet cinema of scale and technical artistry remained constant throughout the period. The use of cinema as a political tool was also a constant throughout the period, although in different guises, so that the blunt use of cinema by the Stalinists is almost unrecognisable to the sophisticated dramas employed in the thaw to promote social unity and harmony.

While not the sole theme of Soviet cinema, the Great Patriotic War was a key subject matter whether as part of a party led propaganda effort as was in the early part of the decade or whether as a cathartic exhumation as in the latter half. The approaches of the cinema of the era shifted as did the internal politics of the USSR; politics led life and art in the worker's state, under both Stalin and Kruschev.

The state demanded propaganda in the reign of Stalin and it got it. Rigid formulaic films were the norm, with repetitive plots and themes. Those films did display some merit in the technical sphere but the resources the larger productions received made this a likely outcome. Red Army soldiers were requisitioned throughout the cinematic history of the USSR, giving battle scenes an impressive scale. This scale was not limited to the Stalinist era, the 1968 adaptation of 'War and Peace' featured a cast of literally thousands of Red Army soldiers. As films were a consequence of state funding commercial success was less of a goal than in other film industries, which gave Soviet cinema it's artistic nature. Soviet camera work is frequently breathtaking as in 'Cranes are Flying' and 'Soy Cuba', but also in 'Battleship Potemkin'. So the best features of the post-war cinema were a result of Red Army co-operation and the structure of Soviet cinema.

During “the Thaw” the loosening of the ideological constraints produced both an increase in qualitative and quantitative terms, and also to international acclaim for Soviet cinema. The ideological constraints on cinema remained though, and instead of decrying anti-soviet behaviour the emphasis shifted to anti-social behaviour. This was a subtle shift, and the harmonious society that the CPSU envisaged was still promoted in this manner. The protagonists remain loyal Soviet citizens, hard-working and honest.

'The Thaw' itself was not merely a relaxation of cultural control but itself a political tool which was used by Kruschev against the orthodox Stalinists that remained in the upper echelons of the state and CPSU. The liberalisation of culture brought tangible benefits, such as the credibility that Palme d'Or which 'Cranes are Flying' and the BAFTA of 'Ballad of a Soldier' won bestowed upon Soviet cinema and the increase in cinematic output as a measure of socialist growth. Films still were controlled and censored though, so all films released in the period were state approved.

Bibliography

Orlando Figes, Natasha's Dance: A Cultural History of Russia, (Penguin, 2002)

Peter Kenez, Cinema and Soviet Society 1917 – 1953,(Cambridge University Press, 1992)

Anna Lawton, Kinoglasnost: Soviet Cinema in our Time, (Cambridge University Press: 1992)

Natacha Laurent - Deconstructing Stalin in Mikhail Chiaureli’s Kliatva (1946)http://web.uct.ac.za/conferences/filmhistorynow/papers/nlaurent.rtf

Mira Liehm and Antonin J. Liehm, The Most Important Art: Soviet and Eastern European Film after 1945, (University of California, 1977)

Megan Ratner, Introduction to Neo-Realism http://www.greencine.com/static/primers/neorealism1.jsp

Filmography

Sergei Bondarchuk (dir), Destiny of a Man (MosFilm, 1959)

Sergei Bondarchuk (dir), War and Peace (MosFilm, 198)

Mikheil Chiaureli (dir), The Fall of Berlin (MosFilm, 1949)

Mikheil Chiaureli (dir), The Oath (Tbilisis Kinostudia, 1946)

Grigori Chukhrai (dir), Ballad of a Solider (MosFilm, 1959)

Sergei Eisenstein (dir), Battleship Potemkin (GosKino, 1925)

Mikhail Kalatozov (dir), Soy Cuba/I am Cuba (MosFilm, 1964)

Mikhail Kalatozov (dir), Cranes are Flying (MosFilm, 1957)

Mira Liehm and Antonin J. Liehm, The Most Important Art: Soviet and Eastern European Film after 1945, (University of California, 1977) page 48

From Kruschev's speech “On the Personality Cult and its Consequences” from the Guardian series “Great Speeches of the 20thCentury” accessed at 16:22 on 01/03/2010 http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2007/apr/26/greatspeeches

Peter Kenez, Cinema and Soviet Society 1917 – 1953,(Cambridge University Press, 1992) page 227

Mira Liehm and Antonin J. Liehm, The Most Important Art: Soviet and Eastern European Film after 1945, (University of California, 1977) page 37

Peter Kenez, Cinema and Soviet Society 1917 – 1953,(Cambridge University Press, 1992) page 211

Italian Cinema's Neo-Realist movement actually began during the second world war in which conditions were just as harsh as the USSR, and shares a time frame of roughly 1943 to 1952 which corresponds roughly to the period of post-war Stalinism and as such is an interesting comparison. Introduction to Neo-Realism by Megan Ratnerhttp://www.greencine.com/static/primers/neorealism1.jsp Accessed at 12:00 on 03/03/2010

Natacha Laurent - Deconstructing Stalin in Mikhail Chiaureli’s Kliatva (1946) page 1, From websitehttp://web.uct.ac.za/conferences/filmhistorynow/papers/nlaurent.rtf accessed at 20:10 on 05/03/2010

Peter Kenez, Cinema and Soviet Society 1917 – 1953,(Cambridge University Press, 1992) page 229/230

Peter Kenez, Cinema and Soviet Society 1917 – 1953,(Cambridge University Press, 1992) page 228/229

Mira Liehm and Antonin J. Liehm, The Most Important Art: Soviet and Eastern European Film after 1945, (University of California, 1977) page 61 - 62

Anna Lawton, Kinoglasnost: Soviet Cinema in our Time, (Cambridge University Press: 1992) page 2

Something which was in many ways necessary following the Great Patriotic War when millions of Soviet citizens collaborated with the Nazis and millions of soldiers saw the material prosperity of the west first hand.

The Soviet High Command during the Great Patriotic War

Peter Kenez, Cinema and Soviet Society 1917 – 1953,(Cambridge University Press, 1992) page 240

Mira Liehm and Antonin J. Liehm, The Most Important Art: Soviet and Eastern European Film after 1945, (University of California, 1977) page 66

From the Cannes Film Festival Website, accessed at 16:52 on 08/03/2010 from http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/archives/ficheFilm/id/3512.html

Mikhail Kalatozov (dir), Cranes are Flying (MosFilm, 1957), at 22:30

Mira Liehm and Antonin J. Liehm, The Most Important Art: Soviet and Eastern European Film after 1945, (University of California, 1977) page 200

From IMDB website accessed at 21:49 on 08/03/2010 from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0052600/awards

Grigori Chukhrai (dir), Ballad of a Solider (MosFilm, 1959) 02:41

From IMBD http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0063794/ accessed at 13:02 on 08/03/2010